Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What would this mean for Boston specifically? Like which neighborhoods would you like to be more activated?
I was speaking pretty generally of the city in terms of how street activity tends to drop off fairly quickly outside of relatively limited pockets.
A corridor like Warren Street running through Dudley Square and Roxbury would be a great candidate for more low-to-midrise infill with commercial activity: https://goo.gl/maps/7wULWkQoy6t
By comparison, you'll find more of this kind of thing in SF (a segment of Mission Street, pretty removed from the downtown core): https://goo.gl/maps/x51ME2wW8d52
Again, this is not to knock Philly or Boston. Both have many nodes of impressive vibrancy, including many outside of their respective cores; my point is just that I could see SF is pushing itself further as street activity is at least somewhat more noticeable across a greater footprint of its outer neighborhoods.
By comparison, you'll find more of this kind of thing in SF (a segment of Mission Street, pretty removed from the downtown core): https://goo.gl/maps/x51ME2wW8d52
Ok that's fair. I was worried you were expecting too much of Roxbury and Dorchester, which are (I think) pound-for-pound less urban than the northern suburbs: Cambridge, Somerville, Chelsea, etc.
However, that street in SF was also more residential than I was expecting; a similar level to Roxbury and Dorchester, and a good example to try to replicate.
One street in Boston that your SF example reminded me of a bit is Blue Hill Avenue, though you're right that Mission Street appears to have a lot fewer vacant lots than Blue Hill Ave.
I was speaking pretty generally of the city in terms of how street activity tends to drop off fairly quickly outside of relatively limited pockets.
A corridor like Warren Street running through Dudley Square and Roxbury would be a great candidate for more low-to-midrise infill with commercial activity: https://goo.gl/maps/7wULWkQoy6t
By comparison, you'll find more of this kind of thing in SF (a segment of Mission Street, pretty removed from the downtown core): https://goo.gl/maps/x51ME2wW8d52
Again, this is not to knock Philly or Boston. Both have many nodes of impressive vibrancy, including many outside of their respective cores; my point is just that I could see SF is pushing itself further as street activity is at least somewhat more noticeable across a greater footprint of its outer neighborhoods.
I'd agree here. Chicago, much like SF, had incredible street level vibrancy throughout it's core and neighborhoods. Main drags with mixed use living/commercial activity for miles at a time in every direction.
I will say, at least for Downtown Boston, some neighborhoods are viewed as untouchable. Beacon, majority of the South End, majority of the Back Bay. You can't build a commercially cohesive city with so many breaks for grandfathered in buildings/historic brownstones. And, in the neighborhoods like Southie, much more can and will be done to make it more appealing for foot traffic and buzz. 10s of thousands of young professionals with money in that neighborhoods, yet only 5-6 legitimate bars and restaurants. It's not self sustaining as compared to, say, an Old Town in Chicago.
I was speaking pretty generally of the city in terms of how street activity tends to drop off fairly quickly outside of relatively limited pockets.
A corridor like Warren Street running through Dudley Square and Roxbury would be a great candidate for more low-to-midrise infill with commercial activity: https://goo.gl/maps/7wULWkQoy6t
By comparison, you'll find more of this kind of thing in SF (a segment of Mission Street, pretty removed from the downtown core): https://goo.gl/maps/x51ME2wW8d52
Again, this is not to knock Philly or Boston. Both have many nodes of impressive vibrancy, including many outside of their respective cores; my point is just that I could see SF is pushing itself further as street activity is at least somewhat more noticeable across a greater footprint of its outer neighborhoods.
I reckon that has to do with the density and transit access. Warren Street looks like it definitely has a lot of space for it without destroying historic landmarked buildings, but it's a decent trek away from any rail lines. Dorchester Avenue seems pretty doable and looks to be getting there.
What is an equivalent to Mission Street in Boston in terms of a long-running commercial thoroughfare that's mostly well-served by transit and serves many neighborhoods?
What is an equivalent to Mission Street in Boston in terms of a long-running commercial thoroughfare that's mostly well-served by transit and serves many neighborhoods?
Massachusetts Avenue may be the best equivalent? In fact Davis Square is roughly as close to Boston as the spot Duderino posted is close to downtown SF (looking at google maps anyway). It may be a little bit farther.
Boston feels the most vibrant and urban of the three in my honest opinion.
Boston certainly can. I've seen Boston so crowded on a Saturday that you cannot see sidewalk. On those days, it's about as crowded as any city I've ever seen. However, I do think it's inconsistent, and have been known to make this exact point on other threads. I'm not sure what causes the variability outside of weather and student population.
I would say that SF was more consistent as far as buzz, though I never saw SF get crowded like Boston..
Boston certainly can. I've seen Boston so crowded on a Saturday that you cannot see sidewalk. On those days, it's about as crowded as any city I've ever seen. However, I do think it's inconsistent, and have been known to make this exact point on other threads. I'm not sure what causes the variability outside of weather and student population.
I would say that SF was more consistent as far as buzz, though I never saw SF get crowded like Boston..
When during the year? Because a Saturdayduring the Summer Boston is dead between College students being gone and anyone with any sort of wealth fleeing to the countryside there's probably like 400,000 people in the city.
When during the year? Because a Saturdayduring the Summer Boston is dead between College students being gone and anyone with any sort of wealth fleeing to the countryside there's probably like 400,000 people in the city.
I mean, as compared to even Chicago, Boston really slows down in the winter. While I understand it's a mix of weather and folks heading north to the mountains, it doesn't get that way (even on a per capita basis) compared to Chicago or NY or SF. Early spring and late fall - March/April and November- can feel dead, especially for a city as densely populated as Boston.
Again, I wish I knew why there was such fluctuation.. But I can't figure it out.. All I know it that it's not always weather.
I mean, as compared to even Chicago, Boston really slows down in the winter. While I understand it's a mix of weather and folks heading north to the mountains, it doesn't get that way (even on a per capita basis) compared to Chicago or NY or SF. Early spring and late fall - March/April and November- can feel dead, especially for a city as densely populated as Boston.
Again, I wish I knew why there was such fluctuation.. But I can't figure it out.. All I know it that it's not always weather.
I would say between Sept-Nov and March-May Boston is busy but other than that Boston is closer to more things than either NY or Chicago so people leave the city more (and it's easier to get out too)
Boston basically doesn't have a Friday afternoon rush hour during the Summer
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
